Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !

Posts Tagged ‘Obamacare’

Rehberg Amendment to Defund Obamacare Passes House

What do you think this means for the future of Obamacare?!…

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Denny Rehberg, Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies today released the following statement after his amendment to prevent funds during the 2011 fiscal year from being used for any employee, officer, contractor, or grantee of any department or agency funded by his portion of the bill to implement the provisions of Obamacare.“Today’s vote is the latest victory for the American public and our country in preventing the disastrous Obamacare law from forever damaging our health care system and hampering job creation. Every dollar spent is a dollar wasted because ultimately Obamacare will fail.  That is certain, whether the Supreme Court declares it unconstitutional as two federal courts already have, or it’s overturned by a new Senate Majority and President in 2012 or it simply collapses under the unsustainable bulk of the ineptly crafted policy.  Our efforts – and my amendment – will save billions of wasted funding while opening the door for true health care reform that reduces costs and improves access.”

via Congressman Denny Rehberg.

Don’t Not Do That!

Don’t Not Do That!

For the first time the Federal Government has mandated that all citizens must purchase a product: health insurance.  If citizens fail to purchase the product they become law breakers subject to fines and penalties enforced by the IRS although we’ve been repeatedly assured this is not a tax.  According to the Federal attorneys arguing that this ground-breaking regulation is constitutional the Commerce Clause provides the authorization.  In other words, not taking an action is now considered commerce by the Federal Government.  In effect the Federal Government maintains for the first time in American History and perhaps in the History of the world that not doing something is doing something.  It is this type of newspeak, circular logic, and sophistry which destroys the credibility of those who tell us less is more.

Officially known as America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, this was the first entitlement passed without bipartisan support.  The only bipartisan part about it was that thirty nine Democrats voted with the Republicans against it.  Thus it passed with a slim majority and no Republican votes.  It was also passed over the objections of a majority of the population.  The new entitlement popularly known as Obamacare purports to insure tens of millions of previously uninsured people maintain the benefit levels of everyone else and lower the costs.  But will it stand the tests to which it is being subjected?  Will it ever be implemented?

With the date for full implementation placed years in the future step-by-step the new regulations, fees, and mandates are trickling into our lives.  However, although the President and his party managed to push this through Congress it won’t stand without a fight.  The debate has moved from the legislature and is wending its way through the courts.  So far two judges have ruled it constitutional and two have ruled it unconstitutional.  These rulings also followed party lines.  Judges appointed by Democrats ruled it constitutional and judges appointed by Republicans ruled it unconstitutional.  This will eventually be decided by the Supreme Court. 

If this is decided in favor of the Federal Government it paves the way for a classic 10th Amendment confrontation.  Several states such as Virginia, have passed laws saying that no law can require their citizens to purchase health insurance.  Since nowhere in the document does the Constitution give the Federal Government the power to mandate that citizens purchase anything this would clearly lie with the confines of the 10th Amendment which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In contravention to the States appeal to the 10th Amendment the Federal Government will point to the Supremacy Clause which states, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”  Using this as their rational as they did in the Arizona Immigration case the Federal Government using the Federal Courts will force states to legally step aside.  Then buying health insurance will no longer be an option because failing to do so will be illegal. In other words, “Don’t not do that!” or face the full force of the law and miraculously not doing something becomes doing something.

Another issue which might surface along the way is the question of waivers.  It seems many of the organizations, unions, and businesses who supported the law and helped lobby for its passage don’t want to live under its benevolent care.  Consequently the Obama Administration has issued hundreds of waivers exempting the President’s supporters from compliance.  This raises the question of the government passing laws that apply to some people but not to others.  Traditionally legislatures have always had the power to suspend the enforcement of laws in special cases.  However this has never been a power wielded by the executive in any except authoritarian states.  This flood of waivers raises another potential constitutional question with reference to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment which states that everyone is guaranteed, “the equal protection of the laws” meaning that the state must apply laws equally and cannot give preference to one person or class of persons over another.

In reference to all these matters whatever the courts may say President Obama has already signaled that he will enforce the strictures of the law even if they are found unconstitutional.

Considering not taking an action to be commerce opens the door to many interesting possibilities. I didn’t buy Apple stock when it was $10 a share can I have my profits now? 

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion for Southside Virginia Community College.  He is the author of the History of the Future @ View the trailer for Dr. Owens’ latest book @ © 2011 Robert R. Owens  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook.

Maxine poses an Obamacare question! Good Question!

Maxine poses an Obamacare question! Good Question!

Let me get this straight . . . .
We’re going to be “gifted” with a health care
plan we are forced to purchase and
fined if we don’t,

Which purportedly covers at least
ten million more people,

without adding a single new doctor,
but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,

written by a committee whose chairman
says he doesn’t understand it,

passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but
exempted themselves from it,

and signed by a President who smokes,

with funding administered by a treasury chief who
didn’t pay his taxes,

for which we’ll be taxed for four years before any
“benefits” take effect,

by a government which has
already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare,

all to be overseen by a surgeon general
who is obese,
and financed by a country that’s broke!!!!!

What could
possibly go wrong?



Under Obamacare a micro chip would be implanted into your neck to track your Healthcare Visits or any other activity deemed by the secretary

Microchiping included in Healthcare Bill page 1004


The Obama Health care bill under Class II (Paragraph 1, Section B) specifically includes ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable.” Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1, section B:

14 ‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to in15 formation respecting a device described in paragraph (1),

16 including claims data, patient survey data, standardized 17 analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of 18 data from disparate data environments, electronic health 19 records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the 20 Secretary”

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Let’s see… Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is a “implantable radiofrequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”


This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. With the reform of the private insurance companies, who charge outrageous rates, many people will switch their coverage to a more affordable insurance plan. This means the number of people who choose the public option will increase. This also means the number of people chipped will be plentiful as well. The adults who choose to have a chip implanted are the lucky (yes, lucky) ones in this case. Children who are “born in the United States who at the time of birth is not otherwise covered under acceptable coverage” will be qualified and placed into the CHIP or Children’s Health Insurance Program (what a convenient name). With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child. Children conceived by parents who are already covered under the public option will more than likely be implanted with a chip by the consent of the parent. Eventually everyone will be implanted with a chip. And with the price and coverage of the public option being so competitive with the private companies, the private company may not survive. The Beast intends to control the world and the activities of all humans on the planet with this tracking data chip.

House GOP moves to defund health care law

House Republicans are taking another shot at the health care law, this time with a threat to cut off funding.

By Catalina Camia, USA TODAY

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said he expects an amendment to defund the law will be offered next week when the House considers a budget for the rest of 2011.

The amendment is likely to be offered by Rep. Dennis Rehberg, R-Mont., chairman of the House appropriations panel that funds the Health and Human Services Department. Rehberg announced recently that he will run in 2012 for the Senate seatnow held by Democrat Jon Tester.

Cantor told reporters on Tuesday that “one way or the other” the budget bill will “preclude any funding” for the health care, and spoke of Rehberg’s “insistence” that such a provision will be offered.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi’s office sent out an e-mail to reporters chiding Republicans for the defunding effort.

“Instead of focusing on Americans’ number one priority — jobs — Republicans are threatening patients’ rights and moving to put health insurance companies back in charge,” said Drew Hammill, a Pelosi spokesman.

When Rehberg was appointed chairman of the health appropriations panel, he made clear to reporters that President Obama’s signature domestic achievement was in his sights.

“I will defund Obamacare if we’re not successful repealing it,” Rehberg told the Bozeman (Mont.) Daily Chronicle.

The GOP-led House last month easily passed a bill to repeal the health care law, but majority Democrats blocked a similar effort in the Senate.

Meanwhile, according to The Hill, an Iowa Republican told a Tea Party gathering that the effort to defund the health care law has a precedent.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said Democrats used the same strategy to cut off funding for the Vietnam War. But he told the town hall meeting that he’ll push to defund the law permanently.

Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !